>> thank you all for being with us this morning. that is all for "new day." it is time now for "cnn newsroom" with poppy harlow. >> see you tomorrow. hi, everyone. good morning. i'm poppy harlow in new york. so glad you're with me. we are watching the white house this hour, as we do every morning. but any second now, president trump is due to leave on a day trip, highlighting jobs and trade in iowa and illinois. this is after a new and unexpected truce with the european union. the president who recently called the eu a foe and on tuesday declared tariffs are the greatest agreed yesterday to try to make a deal to scrap them altogether with european. there's also the question of summit 2.0 with vladimir putin, which now is off the agenda for the fall, at least, before it was ever really officially on the agenda. let's go to the white house. jeremy diamond is there. so let's begin with this and what's ahead for the president today. as he heads to some states where he should be warmly welcomed, especially in iowa, but his

moves on trade have been angering a lot of his base there. >> that's absolutely right. you know, the farmers in iowa and illinois, those are the areas where farmers have been the hardest hit by some of the president's actions on the trade front, but they may be a little bit relieved to hear the president talk about some of the deal to make a deal, lest call it, that the president made yesterday, with the european union. that was essentially what he and the european union agreed to yesterday, was simply to move forward, to begin negotiations, to try and eliminate all tariff and non-tariff barriers between the two countries. really, what it's going to do for the european union is stave off the president's threat to impose 25% tariff on automobile imports from the european union. and this is going to be something that the president is likely going to address today, when he heads to those two states. iowa and illinois, both, the top soybean and corn producers. two agricultural products that were hit by retaliatory tariffs

from the european union. so the president will likely be able to address that. but he is also going to be addressing the initial part of this, which is the steel issue. he's visiting steel plants in dubuque, in particular, that recently restarted a furnace thanks in part to his tariffs. >> and also, when it comes -- we'll see him on the ground there. i know he's taking off shortly. we'll see him on the ground across the midwest today. but when it comes to vladimir putin coming to the white house, right around the midterms, that's no longer on the table? >> reporter: that's right. before the moscow had a chance to accept the president's invitation for vladimir putin to arrive in washington, to come for summit 2.0, the white house announcing yesterday that it is, in fact, pushing that back, saying that it won't have a next summit between trump and putin until, at least next year. so that's going to be putting it off for at least past the midterms and the possibility, though, is still very real that trump and putin could meet ge again, perhaps on the sidelines

of one those multi-national k x conferences. >> jeremy, thanks very much. again, he's not taking questions this morning as he heads to air force one. so if you are one of the americans who believes that bipartisanship no longer exists on capitol hill, apparently you didn't catch the pushback that secretary of state mike pompeo faced from democrats and republicans on the senate foreign relations committee. for hours yesterday, he tried to rebut accusations from the republican committee chairman that when it comes to russia and north korea and other hot spots, the administration has ready, fire, aim mentality. let's go to the state department, michelle kosinski is there. it was quite a scene, frankly. >> yeah, i mean, this was rough from the start. and you mentioned the republican chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, bob corker. he just laid it all out there from the beginning, starting with this striking criticism of not only president trump, saying that he creates distrust in america and beyond, but also of his entire administration. i mean, corker said that he feels that the trump white house wakes up every morning and just

makes up foreign policy, as they go. saying this to the secretary of state, mike pompeo, who was absolutely on the defensive. so, remember, this was the big chance for all of these senators to finally get some answers, on what exactly happened between president trump and russian president vladimir putin during this two-hour-long closed-door meeting in helsinki. but time after time, pompeo just would not answer these questions, often with this snarky attitude, saying these were private conversations. even the simplest question, did trump tell you what happened? the best pompeo could muster was that he has a pretty complete understanding of the conversation. listen to some of this exchange. >> what is it that causes the president to purposefully, purposefully create distrust in these institutions? and what we're doing? >> senator, i just disagree with most of what you just said there. >> has the president told you what he and president putin discussed in their two-hour

closed-door meeting in helsinki? >> the president has a prerogative to choose who's in meetings or not. i'm confident you've had private one-on-one meetings in your life as well. you've chose than setting as the most efficient way to -- >> i've asked you a question. you can't eat my seven minutes, mr. secretary. >> the president disclosed what he said to president putin about russian interference in our elections and he said he's confident as a result of that conversation that vladimir understands that it won't be tolerated. >> i wish he had said that in public in helsinki. >> pompeo just kept using the same mantra for many questions, that u.s. policy hasn't changed. but obviously, that didn't answer the questions. it wasn't enough for many of these senators, both democrat and republican. but one thing that pompeo stated clearly, was that president trump believes the u.s. intelligence community's assessment that russia did interfere in the 2016 election, but that is something that trump himself would not say while he stood side by side with vladimir putin. >> right, pompeo said yesterday, i know this, i've been briefing him on it for a year, but then why did the president not say it

on the world stage, literally? michelle, thank you very much. with me now, susan glasser and susan page. nice to have you both. yesterday, pompeo worked hard to project toughness. but when you look at the actual answers, as michelle kosinski just laid out, they lacked important details and actual answers on the questions. "the new york times" this morning calls his testimony an elaborate cleanup effort. did he clean anything up? >> well, i think what he's trying to do is not necessarily even so much as definitively answer the questions or clean things up with, but create enough plausible alternate narrative of the case. he's trying to offer cover to republicans who made very clear they were very uncomfortable last week, with president trump's performance in helsinki. what i was struck by was the fact that it was such a combative, testy, at times, even nasty response from mike pompeo. where on earth did you senators

get the idea, he seemed to say, there's this narrative out there that we're not tough on russia. we're the toughest administration on russia that you've ever seen. and for a year and a half, we've heard this. it's an amazing argument. the president's secretary of state sat there for three hours and basically said, don't listen to what the president of the united states says. that's not u.s. policy. u.s. policy is what i'm here to tell you. and he listed a long line of, you know, relatively tough actions on russia that any administration, democrat or republican might take. but again, it's an argument that asks republicans and democrats to ignore the very consistent views coming from the president himself. that's just unprecedented. >> i mean, i don't think that there, rachel, is a question over whether arming ukraine or selli ing javelin anti-tank missiles to ukraine is a tough action. but the action is so divided and so antithetical to the rhetoric that's coming out of the president over and over again.

listen to this exchange between the republican chairman of the committee, bob corker and pompeo. >> but it's the president's actions that create tremendous distrust in our nation, among our allies. it's palpable. we meet and talk with them. is there a strategy to this or is it -- what is it that causes the president to purposefully, purposefully create distrust in these institutions and what we're doing? >> senator, i just disagree with most of what you just said there. >> so he -- i mean, he laid it out, there's a little more than you heard earlier, rachel. he's retiring, though. corker's retiring. how powerful is it to hear something from him who doesn't need to be re-elected versus from, say, another republican in a tough district? >> you know, he's retiring, but he's still the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee. and his voice, you know, it carries significant weight here. and the fact that he not only

said what you played right there, he also said, trump was, quote, submissive and deferenthial to putin. we're seeing criticism from people who don't speak out as often. one that comes to mind, bob goodlatte, the chairman of the judiciary committee rarely says anything against the president came out and pushed back on specifically his press conference with russia. and i think that lawmakers brought pompeo up to the hill to try to get answers, right? that's exactly what corker said, but he wouldn't answer a lot of those questions. one thing that in particular stuck out to me was that he compared this one-on-one meeting with the president and vladimir putin to a private meeting that a senator may have, where they may not just want to talk about it. it's private, what he said.

but this was so different. this was a huge summit on the world stage with a leader that hacked our elections, according to his own -- president trump's own national security adviser. this was an act of war. so, of course, people want to know about this. >> and actually, according to the president, is doing it again, in the midterms. but the president says, to help the democrats. but i digress. on north korea, susan, there was a very, very important statement that was made by mike pompeo. when it comes to north korea, listen to this exchange that he had with senator markey. >> we do not have nuclear inspectors yet on the ground in north korea. is that correct, mr. secretary? >> that is correct. >> north korea continues to produce fissile material, nuclear bomb material. is that correct? >> senator, i'm trying to make sure i stay on the correct -- yes, that's correct. just trying to make sure i don't cross into classified information. i'm not trying to hesitate.

yes, they continue to produce ph fissile material. >> susan, correct me if i'm wrong, but that rings to my ears as very significant and the opposite of what the president has put out there publicly in terms of where the north korean negotiations are going. does it show us that the magnitude of the threat from north korea, despite negotiat n negotiations being ongoing, is growing? >> well, look, i think what it shows us, certainly, is that president trump made vastly overstated claims in the immediate aftermath of the singapore summit as to what exactly it had accomplished. and in fact, there was no substantiative, and fleshed out agreement. as secretary of state pompeo outlined several times, he's the one in charge of going back to north korea and actually chiefing an agreement. and when he was pressed, interestingly by senator markey and several others yesterday on this, he basically said over and over again, well, i agree, it's not in the original agreement from singapore, but we've talked

about a lot of other things since. and when he was pressed later, is there any verifiable progress towards denuclearization that you can cite to us today? i thought it was a fascinating moment where the secretary of state actually just said, well, the verifiable progress is that they're sitting down with us in talks, which isn't exactly what anyone else would define as denuclearization. >> that's true. rachel, before we go, did anything get accomplished yesterday, or is this just partisan politics? not just partisan, i guess, many of them on the same side, but what got accomplished yesterday in your mind? >> look, i think the white house saw this as an opportunity to sort of clean up and try to refocus the narrative. pompeo stressed over and over again, the actions that the administration has taken, for example, against russia, trying to say, again, look at what the administration is doing. don't listen to the president. but the reality is, on capitol hill and around this whole country, people are listening to

what trump says about putin. >> i ask you -- i ask you because of this exchange, for example. you had this exchange between senator menendez and mike pompeo. let's listen. >> senator, i understand the game that you're playing. >> if president obama did what president trump did in helsinki, i would be peeling you off the capital ceiling, please. >> does that provide answers for the american people? >> if anything, i think it gave lawmakers a chance to really lay some markers down with the administration. that is absolutely true what the democratic senator, menendez, just said, that if obama would have done half of things that the president has said about putin, republicans would be talking about impeachment right now. it did give lawmakers, at least, the chance to really lay down a marker. >> thank you both. susan glasser, rachel bade, nice to have you. ahead for us, a hundred

secret reportings? that's what the government seized from michael cohen. could it spell trouble for the president's self-proclaimed fixer? and this? >> did michael cohen betray you, mr. president? >> thank you. >> in a move that should be deeply troubling to every american, regardless of party, the white house bans our cnn reporter, kaitlan collins from an open event in the rose garden over questions the white house calls inappropriate. they were anything but. d. it's a high-tech revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. smarter sleep will change your life.

you finayou know it! chair? woah! (laughter) hahaha-aaaahhhh! gorilla glue. of course. gorilla glue expands into the materials to form an incredibly strong bond. for the toughest jobs on planet earth. but behr premium stain y can weather any weather. overall #1 rated, weathers it all. find our most advanced formula exclusively at the home depot.

kiss and make up, after calling the eu a foe on trade just a few weeks ago, now all seems well between president trump and the president of the european commission. a warm embrace and a rose garden announcement after three hours of negotiations yesterday afternoon. the president writes, quote, obviously the european union, as represented by juncker, and the united states is represented by yours truly, love each other. so was there a major breakthrough on trade?

sort of. or at least a deal to make a deal? our chuckling chief business correspondent, christine romans -- >> i thought they were breaking up two weeks ago, but now it's a makeup. >> all is well. is this a deal? >> it's a trade detente at this moment. and you're right, it's a deal to make a deal. and there's no schedule in here for how we're going to chart progress. but, look, investors are very glad that there aren't 20 or 25% tariffs on european cars coming to the united states. that was their big concern. so what are they working towards here? zero tariffs is the goal here. something you've seen the president tweeting about and that the europeans have apparently agreed to. reduced trade barriers overall. and that includes subsidies and other trade impabarriers that at necessarily tariffs. work towards fixing those u.s. metal tariffs that the europeans absolutely hate. and those retaliatory tariffs on, you know, things like bourbon and harley davidson, try to resolve those. and the eu promises to buy more soybeans and natural gas. all of this has to be ratified

by the 28 members of the eu, as well. a lot of work to be done here, a deal to make a deal. but it's going in the right direction. it's not going in the direction of trade war. >> and these tariffs that are in place right now, those are staying. >> they stay, oh, yeah, they stay. those tariffs are still here. so there is some work to be done. a lot of folks are saying, hey, this looks a lot like what the obama administration was trying to negotiate with the europeans back in 2013, this thing called ttip, which fell apart or kind of petered out after the uk voted to leave the european union. so there's a lot of complicated pieces at play here. but going in the right direction. and that's what -- that's what the market certainly liked yesterday. >> stay with me. i want to get to the facebook news with you in just a moment. but before i do that be with let me bring in my next guest, austan goolsbee, and art laffer is here, former economic adviser to president reagan and the trump campaign. art, as much as i want talk about the laffer curve for this entire time, i won't, and i will begin with the news at hand.

nice to have you both. austan, but let me start with you on whether you think zero tariffs both ways is an achievable goal and one that would be good for america. >> on all products, it would be good for america, but it's not fully achievable. i think what happened here, it's a little subtle, but it's smart. the european s looked at the ol experience of the companies when donald trump was kind of stomping around, tweeting about individual companies. and they announced things that they were already doing or that they already agreed to, as if they were new, so that the trump administration could say, look what we did. and then they just were trying to get the focus off of european and shift it back to china or something else. >> you know, art, you advised the trump team, but you don't like these tariffs. and you know, the president just on tuesday tweeted, "tariffs are the greatest." apparently he's changed his mind. and you've said, if this becomes

a trade war, it would be a disaster. and you do have companies like coca-cola just came out this week and said because of these steel and aluminum tariffs, it's really hurting us. and we've heard that from a number of companies. has this become a trade war? >> i don't think it's a trade war, although goodness knows it could escalate into one. and that's what i hope doesn't happen. but i think the president is very clear on wanting zero tariffs, zero non-trade barriers, and also zero subsidies. he said that at the g-7 in ottawa. he put it out in a tweet. and i can't follow all of his tweets. some of them are contradictory. but his strategy is he thinks by threatening tariffs, he can get them to negotiate and bring us towards free trade. >> but if this is ant trade w-- trade war, what is? >> i was in the white house in the 1970s when nixon put the surcharge. we devalued the dollar. that was a trade war. that led to a 50% collapse in the stock market. one of the worst economies. 1930s, that was a trade war.

the smoot-hawley tariff, that was a trade war of first proportions. what's going on in japan right now versus the rest of the world, that's a trade war. >> but smoot-hawley did exactly what -- i mean, smoot-hawley did, almost a century ago, exactly what -- what we've seen sort of playing out here. so austan, it's not just coke, it's general motors with these warnings about the impact on business, it's harley davidson, and whirlpool, who the majority of their factories are in ohio and iowa, who loved the tariffs at first, but then the steel tariffs came in and they said, whoa, whoa, whoa, we don't like them anymore. so is there a middle ground where some tariffs are b beneficial to american companies but you have to stop at a certain point and pray there's no retaliatory tariffs? >> no, there's not a middle ground. tariffs are bad. i think art is right. this is not a trade war. and hopefully with this truce or whatever you want to call it,

every day we don't have a trade war is a better day for america. >> hear, hear. >> but for sure, there's individual companies who want there to be tariffs on their competitors. but overall for the economy, all of the tariffs are bad. these are just taxes on the american consumers, they hurt the economy and hurt american consumers. >> but isn't there some good news out of this? we heard that european will buy more soybeans and more liquid natural gas from the united states. is that a win? >> well, there's good news and that is, we're not starting a trade war. the soybean -- >> answer my -- come on! answer that specific question. >> that's why i said, they announced things they were already doing, as if they were new. that's great. if that's what keeps us out of a trade war, let's keep making announcements like that! >> i think it's much more positive than austan says. but i do think he's completely correct. this is not a trade war and we are starting to move

ever-so-slightly in the right direction. >> arthur, what does china think, looking at this? >> china thinks they need to get in there and make a deal with us right now and move towards zero tariffs as well. and do something about intellectual property, which does have to be done. china is no longer little bitty, tiny undeveloped company. they're getting to be a very big player on the stage. and have to start behaving as such. they've got to reduce their barriers to u.s. products, and they've got to stop doing intellectual property theft. and that's easy for them to do. they're a terrific country and would be amazingly good partner for ours. remember, without walmart, there is no middle class or lower class prosperity. and without china, there is no walmart. so china really is our trade friend. and we should remember that they're not our enemy. >> austan? china, our trade friend? >> look, we've got some disputes with china, but for sure, we could find a mutually beneficial relationship with china and let's hope we do.

i think, probably, china's getting a little nervous, and the nafta countries, canada and mexico, will get a little nervous, because the president has kind of had this, whatever's in front of me, that's the thing i'm blasting on. so fst is if it's not going to europe, they're probably blasting on one another saying, it's going to be one of us. hopefully it's going to be you. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you, poppy. thank you, usaustan, good seein you. by the way, i wore my yale tie for austan and me. >> there you go! appreciate it. >> thank you. >> thank you. overnight, facebook shares whacked, even as the company reminds its investors that it reaches 2.5 billion people around the world. what happened? christine romans back with me. what happened? >> you know, most companies would love revenue growth of 42% and that's what facebook had. but the problem here is the company is promising that it's going to fight election meddling, it's going to fight fake news dissemination, it's

going to fight privacy breaches. that's going to cost money. it will spend billions on its platform in years to come to make sure that it addresses these big concerns that have dinged its reputation. and some would say, hurt democracy over the past couple of years. and that spending is going to mean it won't make as much money. facebook shares fell more than 20% overnight. if it opens like this in three minutes as we expect it will, poppy, this will be one of the largest hits to market value of a company in history. in fact, it lost more than $100 billion in market value overnight. that is more. that loss in market value is more than the gdps of like 120 countries. it means mark zuckerberg's billions are fewer billions and he falls down the list. >> but this is just -- i know this is too big a conversation, but this is why you have people like jamie dimon, who you just interviewed and warren buffett saying, reporting quarterly like this, you know, you need to be able to have companies that invest money, spend money to ultimately make their business better long-term.

and the street responds to these every three-month reports, which is sort of problematic big picture. >> this is a long-term investment in the credibility and the sustainability of this company. and that's something that mark zuckerberg has talked about and they've had a lot of bad press over the past couple of years. look at futures right now, you could see the dow manage to pull out a decent day there. but look, nasdaq was at a record high yesterday, all the big tech companies will be hit today. s&p will be a little bit lower, but this is a tech-specific story here today. overall, it's that trade detente in europe that is really being overshadowed right now by this facebook problem. >> and imagine if facebook said, we're not doing anything or spend any money on this, that would also be a freakout. >> you're right. >> thanks, romans. >> you're welcome. still ahead, those tapes. the public airing of michael cohen's secretly recorded conversation with candidate donald trump may cause more legal problems for him. we'll explain, next. let's begin.

yes or no? do you want the same tools and seamless experience across web and tablet? do you want $4.95 commissions for stocks, $0.50 options contracts? $1.50 futures contracts? what about a dedicated service team of trading specialists? did you say yes? good, then it's time for power e*trade. the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. looks like we have a couple seconds left. let's do some card twirling twirling cards e*trade. the original place to invest online. ahoy! gotcha! ah! nooooo... noooooo... nooooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent than the leading ordinary brand.

ahoy! (laughing) bounty, the quicker picker upper. you finished preparing overhim for college.rs, in 24 hours, you'll send him off thinking you've done everything for his well-being. but meningitis b progresses quickly and can be fatal, sometimes within 24 hours. while meningitis b is uncommon, about 1 in 10 infected will die. like millions of others, your teen may not be vaccinated against meningitis b. meningitis b strikes quickly. be quick to talk to your teen's doctor about a meningitis b vaccine.

with tripadvisor, finding your perfect hotel at the lowest price... is as easy as dates, deals, done! simply enter your destination and dates... and see all the hotels for your stay! tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites... to show you the lowest prices... so you can get the best deal on the right hotel for you. dates, deals, done! tripadvisor. visit tripadvisor.com

does your business internet provider promise a lot? let's see who delivers more. comcast business gives you gig-speed in more places. the others don't. we offer up to 6 hours of 4g wireless network backup.

everyone else, no way. we let calls from any of your devices come from your business number. them, not so much. we let you keep an eye on your business from anywhere. the others? nope! get internet on our gig-speed network and add voice and tv for $34.90 more per month. call or go online today. federal investigators seized more than 100 secret recordings from michael cohen. that's according to the "washington post" this morning. we already know that at least one includes the president. in that recording, then-candidate trump and cohen discussed buy ing the rights to former playboy model karen mcdougal's story of an alleged affair with the president, which he denies. this morning, questions over if the public release of that recording could actually put cohen in even more legal jeopardy. let's go to our national

politics reporter, mj lee. she joins me. and i think it's interesting that rudy giuliani brought up this exact issues, in the hours after the tape was released on tuesday, here's what giuliani said about it for cohen. >> you know to cooperate with the government, you've got to have credibility. first thing that happens is this guy is going to be disbarred. i mean, it's ridiculous. he's a pariah to the legal profession. >> i mean, he's pointing to the fact that lawyers in the southern district, prosecutors may be pretty ticked that cohen put this out there. >> that's right. you know, what's interesting is that when lanny davis, moichael coh cohen's lawyer released this audio recording to cnn earlier this week, we're learning that the fdny, which is investigating michael cohen right now in a criminal investigation, they actually never got a heads up that this would be happening. and the folks that we are talking to, experts and people who know very well how the fdny functions, they're sort of

raising their eyebrows and wondering, what is actually the strategy behind this? and the issue that they're raising is that the decision to do this by lanny davis and michael cohen's legal team could actually complicate michael cohen's ability to get a deal. now, of course, he hasn't yet been charged with any kind of wrong wrongdoing. we don't even know if investigators are interested in making a deal with him. but the sources that we're talking to are wondering whether the decision to release this audio tape and creating this big recording could jeopardize the chances of getting a deal. and remember, just to put some perspective on this, when stormy daniels, the adult film star who says that she had an affair with donald trump, when she was supposed to go in for an interview with fdny investigators last month, that meeting actually was canceled and their stated reason for canceling that is because the media found out before the interview. so these are not people who like to be caught off guard, who like to see this media circus.

so there are questions being asked about whether this is sound legal strategy on michael cohen's part. >> i remember that. that was avenatti, her lawyer, putting that out there, and very upset that that meeting was canceled. now this is lanny davis putting the tape forward. mj, thanks for the reporting. ahead for us, a cnn reporter banned from an event. a public open event in the rose garden. why? because she asked the president a relevant question. this would trouble all americans this morning, next. what about him? let's do it. ♪ come on.

this summer, add a new member to the family. at the mercedes-benz summer event. lease the glc300 for $429 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. just for a shot. with neulasta onpro patients get their dayr back to be with family, or just to sleep in. strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim).

an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $25 per dose with copay card.

all right. cnn's reporter, kaitlan collins, who covers the white house, day in and day out, guess what happened yesterday? she was banned from an open white house event in the rose garden for what? for doing her job. why? the white house didn't like her questions. questions like this. >> did michael cohen betray you, mr. president? >> thank you, everybody. >> mr. president? >> keep it moving, guys. >> did michael cohen betray you?

>> are you leaning towards tariffs, sir? >> mr. president, are you worried about what moen moep icn is going to say to prosecutors? >> thank you, kaitlan. let's keep it going. >> are you worried about what's on the other tapes, mr. president? >> a few things to understand here. the questions are questions any good reporter would ask. two, kaitlan was in the oval office representing not just cnn, but the press pool. that meaning her questions were on behalf of all of the networks that weren't there able to ask them. three, cohen was yesterday and today a major part of the news cycle and a question of the day. four, the president himself tweeted about cohen and the tape just hours before kaitlan asked those questions. our senior media correspondent, brian stelter, joins me now. this is a day that, you know, all americans should be concerned about, not spruced, though. >> it's quite an escalation. and i think it's important to spotlight this, because we haven't seen something like this at the white house before. we've seen a series of

escalations by the trump administration, but this is the first time that a reporter has been called in and said, your questions were inappropriate. you can't go to the next event. that's essentially what was happened. she was disvisited, i would say she was barred from the event in the rose garden. and she was representing the entire press pool today, all the tv networks, so her questions were also fox's questions and nbc's questions and abc's questions. and that's partly why there's been an unusual show of solidarity for this. fox news speaking up and the white house correspondents' association also speaking out. here's a part of what the association says. and by the way, they represent all the white house reporters. they say, this type of retaliation is wholly inappropriate, wrongheaded, and weak. it cannot stand. reporters asking questions of powerful people, government officials, up to and including the president, helps hold those in power accountable. and that's not just true now with president trump, that's true every year with any president. >> and here's a moment that i was so happy to see from fox news anchor, bret baier yesterday. watch. >> as a member of the white house press pool, fox stands

firmly with cnn on this issue of access. so far, no response from the white house. >> we have since gotten a response from the white house. what do you make of it. >> right, it essentially confirms kaitlan's account. it says she was shouting questions, but wasn't doing anything differently than reporters always do. it's customary when there's a photo op with the president, you get to ask a couple of questions at the end. but i think this entire incident exposes the president's weaknesses. he does not want to have to address issues about michael cohen. he perhaps, does feel betrayed, so doesn't want to answer her question. he does not want to talk about his twisted relationship with vladimir putin. he doesn't want those questions asked, and he certainly doesn't want to answer. so i think that proves, actually, that kaitlan was asking just the right questions. it proves she was on sto something really important today. by the way, today is fox's turn in the press pool. today, it might be their reporter who gets called to the office and says, you can't go to something. it's a very weird moment and hopefully just a yuone-off by t

white house. >> we want you to stay here. we have some breaking news to get to. the stock market just opened a few moments ago. facebook shares are plunging. brian stelter is here as well as christine romans. i'm looking at the stock trading down 18%. >> it just crashed here. a strategy shift for this company. they will focus now on privacy first. and that means privacy over profits. they will have to spend a lot of money, billions of dollars in coming quarters. that will slow growth and hurt the profits of this company. that's what the company says itself. it needs to put privacy first. it's had a terrible run here with the cambridge analytica scandal and the private data of facebook users being disseminated and in some cases sold. and then you have election meddling. and all kinds -- and fake news, a proliferation of fake news. so this is a wake-up call for investors in facebook that it is no longer the wild west. this platform that began as rating how hot girls were in a college dorm room has now grown up into something that is part of democracy around the world

and needs to act more responsibly. it will have to spend money to do that. >> here's the thing. this sell-off seems to be, i think, a lot of analysts would say, who take the long-term view, very short-sighted, brian. this is a company that once again pointed out yesterday, we reach 2.5 billion people around the world. and the way that companies stick around for the long-term and mature, would could argue if you're long facebook still, is that they invest to fix problems and to make the company more sustainable and better. is that not what facebook is doing here? >> facebook is investing so people like the three of us stay on the site. and don't go fleeing to a competitor. facebook's revenues were up, what, 42% year over year. >> anybody would love that revenue. >> what an incredible number. any other company, 42% growth year over year. but it is remarkable to see a ceo like zuckerberg who did start it as a service to maybe meet girls, to have to address the reality that this company affects democracy. and to have to take action by hiring reviewers and content analysts and things like that.

>> christine, i will say the last time facebook stock was down this much was july 27th, 2017. so also in july. we were on the air together. it was when investors had so many questions about facebook's mobile strategy. >> that's right. >> the stock fell over 11% that day. look what facebook did on mobile to correct course on that so quickly. this is a huge company, but a nimble one. >> it is a nimble company. and it's a company that's market cap is $630 billion. it's a big, enormous company. an 18% decline, though, personally, that's $16 or $17 billion off mark zuckerberg's net worth, although he's not going to cry about that, i'm sure. and there are 120-some countries that have gdps about the size of what this company just lost. >> which is all the more reason they have to take responsibilities for some of their problems. >> that's right. tha they've had a big run of bad press. how many times have we been on the air talking about privacy, fake news, election meddling.

>> you have to fix the problems. and not 2017, it was 2012, the last time they had a sell-off like this, a long time ago. it feels like yesterday. i will say sheryl sandberg and some other tech execs will be on the hill in september answering some of these questions. >> the other thing is get out in front of the regulators. if you're facebook, you want to show you're spending money and getting out in front of the regulators who could potentially slow your profit more if they put in more onerous privacy rules. >> that's a big part of this. they have to put in improvements, some of these safe the ga -- safeguards that are necessary for various reasons. but they have a remarkable amount of control over people's digital lives. and with that control comes responsibility. >> it does. but again, facebook stock down 18% on a day when the dow, the broader index is up 150 points. >> that trade detente with europe is what should be driving the market, but instead facebook is getting all the coverage. >> thank you guys very much.

we'll be right back.

welcome back. breaking news. some of president trump's conservative allies in congress are unleashing their strongest attack yet on rod rosenstein. this is about putting forth articles of impeachment against rosenstein. what did you just hear? >> reporter: mark meadows is the leader of the house freedom caucus, trying to impeach rod rosenstein over their concern of not getting enough documents as part of their investigation into how the fbi carried out its probe about the clinton e-mail investigation, the russia investigation. the justice department has not complied with their request they said, something the justice department strongly refuted. i had a chance to talk to meadows. he said he is not trying to interfere with mueller's investigation. he would not rule out pushing for a vote today. you are asking for a scoping

memoir. are you concerned you are asking for documents that could interfere with the mueller investigation? >> really, we're not about interfering with the mueller investigation. what we're about is doing proper oversight and transparency. it's been consistent there. we have been consistent for nine months. in doing that, it's critically important that we get the documents. i can tell you, most of the documents, if there's a legitimate reason on why they shouldn't give it, give us a privilege log and say this is the reason why we're withholding it. the fact is is we're operating in a vacuum. they don't know the number of documents that we should have. after nine months, they should at least say, there are 100,000 responsive documents. you've gotten 50,000. here is the delivery schedule for the rest of them. yet, yesterday they could not answer how many documents are responsive after nine months. how long do you go on?

>> reporter: are you going to make this -- are you going to take this to the floor today? >> hopefully, find a rproductio schedule that works. hopefully, this is a one-day headline. >> reporter: i asked him also, have you spoken to the white house or president trump about this? he said, i have not. he said that perhaps they may try to force the vote today. the more likely situation is they wait until september, because if they voted on this today, almost certainly would lose overwhelmingly on the house floor. there's a lot of republicans who are resistant to this and democrats, of course, furiously oppose it. they see it as an effort to interfere with the mueller investigati investigation. >> including top republicans in the house on this. at least not on board with this officially. thanks. let's dig into this. april doss was the senior

counsel for the russia investigation in 2016 and '17. she's served as the head of intelligence law at nsa. i can't think of anyone more qualified to dive into what this means for the american people. help us sort of decode what articles of impeachment would mean against rod rosenstein. let's first dive into whether you think they have merit. do they rise to the level of highisdemeanordisdemeanors. >> that's right. your question is the most important point. there's nothing in these documents that seems to rise to the level of high creams and miss da me misdemeanors. there's five articles here. the republicans are concerned there's not a second special counsel to look into whether there were abuses and into clinton funding of the steele dossier.

the articles address the issue of the redacted documents provided to the house and the house concerns that the redactions were sort of too heavy, there wasn't enough transparency and the slow toneso provide information. when you look at congressional oversight, what happens is the congressional committees engage in lengthy negotiations with the executive branch over exactly what information can be provided, over the time line. congress has a lot of tools at its disposal. it can withhold funding. it can demand hearings. to move for impeachment on this is far outside the bounds of anything normal. >> is some something with any teeth? is this more show than substance in terms of actually resulting in any action? >> that's a great question. it depends on two things.

it depends on the response from republican leadership in the house and really we should see democrats and republicans from both houses of congress strongly objecting to that, to this articles of impeachment. right now the way these are filed -- they were filed as a non-privileged article, which means it can only get to the house floor with speaker ryan's approval. we know this morning mark meadows said they might refile these articles as a privileged article, in which case they can force them to go to the house floor for a vote. it's important to keep in mind that right now we only have fewer than a dozen congressmen who are signed on to these articles of impeachment. in all likelihood, they won't go anywhere. it looks like another attempt to discredit the russia investigation. that's the big concern. >> of course, just quickly to remind our viewers of rod rosenstein's connection, he

oversees the mueller probe. there are questions about a man who was just confirmed who if rosenstein were out would take over the probe because of questions about his connections to russia. >> that's right. really, anybody who would take rosenstein's place would have the authority to decide what scope bob mueller's investigation should take. that's really the critical thing here. if there was any desire to curtail or constrain the mueller investigation, taking rod rosenstein out of the loop would be a really effective way to do that. that's where we are seeing this concern. >> we did hear meadows say, this has nothing do wito do with tha. we will see where this goes. i appreciate your expertise. thanks for being here. >> thank you. president trump right now on his way to the midwest. he is going to iowa and to illinois. you see the president's daughter.

he will talk about the tariff news and more. stay with us. for years i've trained dogs for the marines - like me, some of these dogs have seen many tours of duty. and for the past 15 years i've been a navy federal member.

thanks to their fast approval process, when it came time to buy a new car, we got everything we needed to transport my wife's little bundle of joy... ... who i just adore. open to the armed forces, the dod, veterans and their families. navy federal credit union. when we switched our auto and home insurance. with liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey! oh, that's my robe.

is it? when you switch to liberty mutual, you could save $782 on auto and home insurance. and still get great coverage for you and your family. call for a free quote today. you could save $782. liberty mutual insurance. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

top of the hour. good morning. i'm poppy harlow in new york. we have a lot of news to get to. the president is en route to iowa. a sudden truth with the eu in his back pocket. the president call s it a breakthrough. this comes a day after the president declared, quote, tariffs are the greatest. i think he changed his mind. he is due to